What this category of data looks like
Data for infrastructure construction declaration materials and case review primarily comes from official approval archives and project execution documents generated during project initiation, construction permit application, and completion acceptance stages. Updates are triggered by project nodes: basic information is updated within 1 business day after project initiation, and materials are archived as static cases after completion acceptance. Most documents are multi-page PDFs or structured forms. Core fields include project ID, construction location, investment budget (unit: ten thousand yuan), construction company qualification level, environmental impact assessment report number, and others. Some cases include scanned drawings and electronic signature files.
What constraints these characteristics impose on tool calling and plugins
Reference only; verify against the target FastGPT release and deployment documentation.
Configuration Settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
toolChoice | auto | Adapts to the automatic matching requirement for multiple types of fields in infrastructure construction declaration materials |
functionCall | Bound to preset infrastructure review field templates | Ensures extracted fields comply with standard project declaration formats |
| Global variable passing configuration | Enabled and bound to workflow token variables | Meets the requirement to pass access tokens generated by workflows to MCP tools |
| Local MCP call permission | Calibrated based on actual testing | Adapts to calls for locally deployed infrastructure data verification tools |
| Cross-team knowledge base authorization | Enabled | Resolves query permission issues when applications and knowledge bases belong to different teams |
| Context retention duration | 600–1200 seconds | Covers the multi-round interaction cycle of infrastructure project review |
Three Common Configuration Mistakes
- Calling the FastGPT application API returns results without context association. The symptom is that the API response only contains the content of a single query, with no historical interaction context. The cause is that the context retention duration parameter is not configured, and session information from historical interactions is not retained.
- MCP tools cannot obtain workflow global variables. The symptom is that the token field is empty or a 401 permission error is returned during tool calling. The cause is that the global variable passing configuration is not enabled, and the access token generated by the workflow is not bound to the tool calling parameters.
- Cross-team knowledge base queries return no relevant content. The symptom is that the API returns "no matching content found". The cause is that cross-team knowledge base authorization is not enabled, so the application cannot access the target team's archive knowledge base.
How to Confirm the Configuration Is Successful
- Initiate a test call that includes historical context, and check if the returned result associates the project ID and approval status from the historical query.
- Configure an MCP tool call in the workflow, pass a preset test token, and check the tool call log to confirm that the parameters are correctly passed.
- After associating the cross-team knowledge base, submit a test query related to the project, and check if matching archive content is returned.
- View the application configuration panel to confirm that the
toolChoiceandfunctionCallconfiguration parameters are correctly loaded and take effect.
The values provided are common starting points and should be measured against the reader's own samples.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-09-28.